The wife of a sponsor of North Carolina’s Amendment One, a proposed change to the state’s constitution that would ensure legal recognition only for marriage between a man and a woman, reportedly offered an eyebrow-raising explanation for her husband’s support of the measure.

Jodie Brunstetter, the wife of state Sen. Peter Brunstetter (R), has found herself embroiled in controversy after suggesting that her husband’s role in writing the bill — which passed the Republican-controlled general assembly last fall — was racially motivated.

According to the alternative Yes! Weekly, which picked up the remarks from freelance journalist and activist Chad Nance, Jodie Brunstetter told a poll worker in Winston-Salem, N.C. Monday that the reason her husband “wrote Amendment 1 was because the Caucasian race is diminishing and we need to uh, reproduce.”

...Aaaaand of course, she denies saying it:

Quote

Brunsetter:

We are looking at the history of the United States and it is already law about what marriage is. Between a man and a woman. And we are looking at how America has been a great country. That’s why people are coming here. And people who founded the United states wrote a Constitution and it has been what has preserved this society. And we were just talking about lots of different things which the gentleman was turning around.

Me:

You didn’t tell that one lady that it was to preserve the Caucasian race because they were becoming a minority?

Brunsetter:

No.

Me:

She’s lying?

Brunsetter:

No. It’s just that same sex marriages are not having children.

Me:

Yeam but you didn’t say anything about Caucasians, white people, preserving them that’s why it was written?

Brunsetter:

No I’m afraid they have made it a racial issue when it is not.

Me:

She didn’t say it was a racial issue. She said that you had said that part of the reason it had been sponsored and written was to preserve the white race.

(a moment later) … you didn’t say anything about Caucasians?

Brunsetter:

I probably said the word.

Me:

You didn’t tell her anything about Caucasians?

Silence.

Me:

I want you to clear it up if you could.

Brunsetter:

Right now I am a little confused myself because there has been confusion here today about this amendment where it is very simple. The opponents are saying things that are not true and there has been a lot of conversation back and forth.

Right now I have some heat stroke going on. Um there has been lots of confusion.

Me:

Did you say anything about Caucasians?

Brunsetter: If I did it wasn’t anything race related.

Me:

But it is about identifying a race. No context on Caucasians?

Brunsetter:

There has been so much talk about this point that there is just a lot of confusion.

Yeah, after four years of being a non-disruptive poster on the forum, never considered a troublemaker, even someone who was liked well enough to be elected Atlasian President, Napoleon should be allowed to stay.

Now, no fan of this amendment or of sponsoring it, but an "alternative newspaper" says that a "freelance jounalist and activist" told them that a "poll worker" told him that the wife of a cosponsor of the amendment told him, apparently unprompted, something about "preserving the caucasian race." After this exceedingly-unlikely game of telephone, we have her statement right down to the "uh." Yeah, that seems pretty unlikely to me.

Now, no fan of this amendment or of sponsoring it, but an "alternative newspaper" says that a "freelance jounalist and activist" told them that a "poll worker" told him that the wife of a cosponsor of the amendment told him, apparently unprompted, something about "preserving the caucasian race." After this exceedingly-unlikely game of telephone, we have her statement right down to the "uh." Yeah, that seems pretty unlikely to me.

That was my first reaction too.

But read that second quote transcripting a conversation between Brunsetter and "Me". Brunsetter could easily have just outright denied mentioning Caucasians and proclaimed the freelance journalist a liar... which is what she would have done if she(Brunsetter) was either telling the truth or a competent liar. Unfortunately for Brunsetter she is clearly an incompotent liar... you need only read the transcript to see that she is both lying and incompotent at lying.

I suppose its because the mainstream American definition of racism is different than mine, but I don't see anything explicitly racist in the statement. Wanting your own group to procreate and thrive doesn't necessarily mean you consider other races to be inferior or have prejudices against them.

I suppose its because the mainstream American definition of racism is different than mine, but I don't see anything explicitly racist in the statement. Wanting your own group to procreate and thrive doesn't necessarily mean you consider other races to be inferior or have prejudices against them.

True, but who speaks of the 'caucasian race' politically in 2012 without meaning it in an exclusivist fashion?

But read that second quote transcripting a conversation between Brunsetter and "Me". Brunsetter could easily have just outright denied mentioning Caucasians and proclaimed the freelance journalist a liar... which is what she would have done if she(Brunsetter) was either telling the truth or a competent liar. Unfortunately for Brunsetter she is clearly an incompotent liar... you need only read the transcript to see that she is both lying and incompotent at lying.

I read the second quote, and it doesn't read like she's lying so much as she is confused and doesn't understand the question (which is how someone who had never said that would probably react; a liar would become defensive and angry with the questioner).

Anyway, this story would've been mindblowingly true and fact if there was a video. Sadly, there is only the reports of some "poll worker" and a transcript of a conversation.

Not exactly super solid damning evidence in my opinion. And yes, this is even after reading the transcript. Though I will admit, the whole "I feel a heat stroke coming on!" quote was a pretty random and desperate sounding defense if she is telling the truth.

Here's a video of the interview/conversation/confrontation, which happened only momentarily after the alleged statements, for the record. And she didn't just say it unprovoked to some random poll-worker; it was in response to a question from someone else at a demonstration outside of an early voting location that an (apparently) off-duty poll worker had overheard, who then complained about it to the 'alternative' journalist who I think was already videotaping his side's demonstration across the street. Scroll down a bit on the page to see the video: http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/05/02/475141/brunstetter-caucasian/?mobile=nc

IMO it's pretty clear she said something questionable; she says that she used the term Caucasian then realizes she probably shouldn't have admitted so, then side-steps/ignores later questions without making any denials.

Here's a video of the interview/conversation/confrontation, which happened only momentarily after the alleged statements, for the record. And she didn't just say it unprovoked to some random poll-worker; it was in response to a question from someone else at a demonstration outside of an early voting location that an (apparently) off-duty poll worker had overheard, who then complained about it to the 'alternative' journalist who I think was already videotaping his side's demonstration across the street. Scroll down a bit on the page to see the video: http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/05/02/475141/brunstetter-caucasian/?mobile=nc

IMO it's pretty clear she said something questionable; she says that she used the term Caucasian then realizes she probably shouldn't have admitted so, then side-steps/ignores later questions without making any denials.

Well alright.

I think the heat stroke comment kind of leans towards her saying something she regrets.

I suppose its because the mainstream American definition of racism is different than mine, but I don't see anything explicitly racist in the statement. Wanting your own group to procreate and thrive doesn't necessarily mean you consider other races to be inferior or have prejudices against them.

I suppose its because the mainstream American definition of racism is different than mine, but I don't see anything explicitly racist in the statement. Wanting your own group to procreate and thrive doesn't necessarily mean you consider other races to be inferior or have prejudices against them.

What purpose do you think specifying any group at all is supposed to serve, then? That the distinction is made in the first place is inherently racist and indicates assigning a higher value of importance to one group over the next.

Yeah, after four years of being a non-disruptive poster on the forum, never considered a troublemaker, even someone who was liked well enough to be elected Atlasian President, Napoleon should be allowed to stay.

I suppose its because the mainstream American definition of racism is different than mine, but I don't see anything explicitly racist in the statement. Wanting your own group to procreate and thrive doesn't necessarily mean you consider other races to be inferior or have prejudices against them.

Yeah, that's kind of a racist sentiment.

^ Seriously.

Not to mention that even if that was a reasonable attitude to have, "caucasian" isn't a thing. What's caucasian culture, for example?

I suppose its because the mainstream American definition of racism is different than mine, but I don't see anything explicitly racist in the statement. Wanting your own group to procreate and thrive doesn't necessarily mean you consider other races to be inferior or have prejudices against them.

Racist groups have been touting the whole "pro-white, not anti-black" mantra for decades.

I suppose its because the mainstream American definition of racism is different than mine, but I don't see anything explicitly racist in the statement. Wanting your own group to procreate and thrive doesn't necessarily mean you consider other races to be inferior or have prejudices against them.

Yeah, that's kind of a racist sentiment.

^ Seriously.

Not to mention that even if that was a reasonable attitude to have, "caucasian" isn't a thing. What's caucasian culture, for example?